v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization v2009.01.01 - Convex Optimization
122 CHAPTER 2. CONVEX GEOMETRY 2.9.2.6.3 Theorem. Convex subsets of positive semidefinite cone. The subsets of the positive semidefinite cone S M + , for 0≤ρ≤M S M +(ρ) ∆ = {X ∈ S M + | rankX ≥ ρ} (232) are pointed convex cones, but not closed unless ρ = 0 ; id est, S M +(0)= S M + . ⋄ Proof. Given ρ , a subset S M +(ρ) is convex if and only if convex combination of any two members has rank at least ρ . That is confirmed applying identity (229) from Lemma 2.9.2.6.1 to (1370); id est, for A,B ∈ S M +(ρ) on the closed interval µ∈[0, 1] rank(µA + (1 −µ)B) ≥ min{rankA, rankB} (233) It can similarly be shown, almost identically to proof of the lemma, any conic combination of A,B in subset S M +(ρ) remains a member; id est, ∀ζ, ξ ≥0 rank(ζA + ξB) ≥ min{rank(ζA), rank(ξB)} (234) Therefore, S M +(ρ) is a convex cone. Another proof of convexity can be made by projection arguments: 2.9.2.7 Projection on S M +(ρ) Because these cones S M +(ρ) indexed by ρ (232) are convex, projection on them is straightforward. Given a symmetric matrix H having diagonalization H = ∆ QΛQ T ∈ S M (A.5.2) with eigenvalues Λ arranged in nonincreasing order, then its Euclidean projection (minimum-distance projection) on S M +(ρ) P S M + (ρ)H = QΥ ⋆ Q T (235) corresponds to a map of its eigenvalues: Υ ⋆ ii = { max {ǫ , Λii } , i=1... ρ max {0, Λ ii } , i=ρ+1... M (236) where ǫ is positive but arbitrarily close to 0.
2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CONE 123 2.9.2.7.1 Exercise. Projection on open convex cones. Prove (236) using Theorem E.9.2.0.1. Because each H ∈ S M has unique projection on S M +(ρ) (despite possibility of repeated eigenvalues in Λ), we may conclude it is a convex set by the Bunt-Motzkin theorem (E.9.0.0.1). Compare (236) to the well-known result regarding Euclidean projection on a rank ρ subset of the positive semidefinite cone (2.9.2.1) S M + \ S M +(ρ + 1) = {X ∈ S M + | rankX ≤ ρ} (237) P S M + \S M + (ρ+1) H = QΥ ⋆ Q T (238) As proved in7.1.4, this projection of H corresponds to the eigenvalue map Υ ⋆ ii = { max {0 , Λii } , i=1... ρ 0 , i=ρ+1... M (1246) Together these two results (236) and (1246) mean: A higher-rank solution to projection on the positive semidefinite cone lies arbitrarily close to any given lower-rank projection, but not vice versa. Were the number of nonnegative eigenvalues in Λ known a priori not to exceed ρ , then these two different projections would produce identical results in the limit ǫ→0. 2.9.2.8 Uniting constituents Interior of the PSD cone int S M + is convex by Theorem 2.9.2.6.3, for example, because all positive semidefinite matrices having rank M constitute the cone interior. All positive semidefinite matrices of rank less than M constitute the cone boundary; an amalgam of positive semidefinite matrices of different rank. Thus each nonconvex subset of positive semidefinite matrices, for 0
- Page 71 and 72: 2.4. HALFSPACE, HYPERPLANE 71 Recal
- Page 73 and 74: 2.4. HALFSPACE, HYPERPLANE 73 C H
- Page 75 and 76: 2.4. HALFSPACE, HYPERPLANE 75 2.4.2
- Page 77 and 78: 2.4. HALFSPACE, HYPERPLANE 77 (conf
- Page 79 and 80: 2.5. SUBSPACE REPRESENTATIONS 79 Ra
- Page 81 and 82: 2.5. SUBSPACE REPRESENTATIONS 81 If
- Page 83 and 84: 2.6. EXTREME, EXPOSED 83 2.6 Extrem
- Page 85 and 86: 2.6. EXTREME, EXPOSED 85 A B C D Fi
- Page 87 and 88: 2.7. CONES 87 2.6.1.3.1 Definition.
- Page 89 and 90: 2.7. CONES 89 0 Figure 30: Boundary
- Page 91 and 92: 2.7. CONES 91 2.7.2 Convex cone We
- Page 93 and 94: 2.7. CONES 93 Then a pointed closed
- Page 95 and 96: 2.7. CONES 95 A pointed closed conv
- Page 97 and 98: 2.8. CONE BOUNDARY 97 So the ray th
- Page 99 and 100: 2.8. CONE BOUNDARY 99 2.8.1.1 extre
- Page 101 and 102: 2.8. CONE BOUNDARY 101 2.8.2 Expose
- Page 103 and 104: 2.8. CONE BOUNDARY 103 From Theorem
- Page 105 and 106: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 107 and 108: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 109 and 110: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 111 and 112: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 113 and 114: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 115 and 116: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 117 and 118: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 119 and 120: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 121: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 125 and 126: 2.9. POSITIVE SEMIDEFINITE (PSD) CO
- Page 127 and 128: 2.10. CONIC INDEPENDENCE (C.I.) 127
- Page 129 and 130: 2.10. CONIC INDEPENDENCE (C.I.) 129
- Page 131 and 132: 2.10. CONIC INDEPENDENCE (C.I.) 131
- Page 133 and 134: 2.12. CONVEX POLYHEDRA 133 It follo
- Page 135 and 136: 2.12. CONVEX POLYHEDRA 135 Coeffici
- Page 137 and 138: 2.12. CONVEX POLYHEDRA 137 2.12.3 U
- Page 139 and 140: 2.12. CONVEX POLYHEDRA 139
- Page 141 and 142: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 143 and 144: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 145 and 146: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 147 and 148: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 149 and 150: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 151 and 152: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 153 and 154: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 155 and 156: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 157 and 158: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 159 and 160: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 161 and 162: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 163 and 164: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 165 and 166: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 167 and 168: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 169 and 170: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
- Page 171 and 172: 2.13. DUAL CONE & GENERALIZED INEQU
122 CHAPTER 2. CONVEX GEOMETRY<br />
2.9.2.6.3 Theorem. <strong>Convex</strong> subsets of positive semidefinite cone.<br />
The subsets of the positive semidefinite cone S M + , for 0≤ρ≤M<br />
S M +(ρ) ∆ = {X ∈ S M + | rankX ≥ ρ} (232)<br />
are pointed convex cones, but not closed unless ρ = 0 ; id est, S M +(0)= S M + .<br />
⋄<br />
Proof. Given ρ , a subset S M +(ρ) is convex if and only if<br />
convex combination of any two members has rank at least ρ . That is<br />
confirmed applying identity (229) from Lemma 2.9.2.6.1 to (1370); id est,<br />
for A,B ∈ S M +(ρ) on the closed interval µ∈[0, 1]<br />
rank(µA + (1 −µ)B) ≥ min{rankA, rankB} (233)<br />
It can similarly be shown, almost identically to proof of the lemma, any conic<br />
combination of A,B in subset S M +(ρ) remains a member; id est, ∀ζ, ξ ≥0<br />
rank(ζA + ξB) ≥ min{rank(ζA), rank(ξB)} (234)<br />
Therefore, S M +(ρ) is a convex cone.<br />
<br />
Another proof of convexity can be made by projection arguments:<br />
2.9.2.7 Projection on S M +(ρ)<br />
Because these cones S M +(ρ) indexed by ρ (232) are convex, projection on<br />
them is straightforward. Given a symmetric matrix H having diagonalization<br />
H = ∆ QΛQ T ∈ S M (A.5.2) with eigenvalues Λ arranged in nonincreasing<br />
order, then its Euclidean projection (minimum-distance projection) on S M +(ρ)<br />
P S M<br />
+ (ρ)H = QΥ ⋆ Q T (235)<br />
corresponds to a map of its eigenvalues:<br />
Υ ⋆ ii =<br />
{ max {ǫ , Λii } , i=1... ρ<br />
max {0, Λ ii } , i=ρ+1... M<br />
(236)<br />
where ǫ is positive but arbitrarily close to 0.